They are changing all of the Celebrity ships' names to have Celebrity in front of the name. So it will be the "Celebrity Summit." This is to match the "Celebrity Solstice" and it also a great marketing tool because it reinforces the name Celebrity.

The Millennium class of vessels (including C. Infinity) are still considered GTS. That refers to the type of engine it has. So they are all Gas Turbine Systems whereas the other ships are considered motor vessels. So the type of ship is not going to change because the name was changed.

They are changing all of the Celebrity ships' names to have Celebrity in front of the name. So it will be the "Celebrity Summit." This is to match the "Celebrity Solstice" and it also a great marketing tool because it reinforces the name Celebrity.

Yes, I figured that. I'm looking for confirmation as to which ships' names and registries have already changed and which are still pending.

BTW, I understand that with the change, it's now possible to have a legal wedding at sea with the master of the vessel officiating.

Quote:

Originally Posted by You

The Millennium class of vessels (including C. Infinity) are still considered GTS. That refers to the type of engine it has. So they are all Gas Turbine Systems whereas the other ships are considered motor vessels. So the type of ship is not going to change because the name was changed.

That's true up to a point. Unfortunately, the usage of classifications is not consistent from one classification society to another. The use of "Motor Ship" (MS) for vessels of Holland America Lines and "Motor Vessel" for all Princess vessels, for example, reflect nothing more than that the lnes use different classification societies to classify their vessels. It's entirely possible that the vessels might fall under the purview of a different classification society due to the change in registry, and it's equally possible that the installation of auxilliary generators with diesel engines as prime movers might have been sufficient to trigger a change of classification by the same society.

And on the ships of the Millennium class, the propulsion actually is an electric motor. The gas turbines are merely the prime movers for the generatrs that supply power to the propulsion motors. Thus, the classification of "Gas Turbine Ship" -- which suggests a gas turbine connected directly to the shaft -- really is not quite accurate. In fact, MV Coral Princess and MV Island Princess use essentially the same propulsion system even though they have the "Motor Vessel" classification.

And on the ships of the Millennium class, the propulsion actually is an electric motor. The gas turbines are merely the prime movers for the generatrs that supply power to the propulsion motors. Thus, the classification of "Gas Turbine Ship" -- which suggests a gas turbine connected directly to the shaft -- really is not quite accurate. In fact, MV Coral Princess and MV Island Princess use essentially the same propulsion system even though they have the "Motor Vessel" classification.

Norm.

Norm:

I am afraid you are 100% incorrect with your statement when trying to say the propulsion systems used by Celebrity Millennium class ships are "essentially the same" as those used on Princess. In fact, nothing could be farther from the truth.

The propulsion system used by Celebrity on their Millennium class ships are called Mermaid PODS and have been a source of problems since their introduction in 2001. Celebrity has admitted in court, under oath, that the Millennium class ship's propulsion systems have a design flaw. This is evidenced by Celebrity's two multi million lawsuits against the two manufactures, which are, Rolls Royce and Alstom manufacturing. It is also evidenced by the eighteen separate times the Mermaid propulsion system used by Celebrity has failed.

Princess uses a propulsion system manufactured by an entirely different company that does not have any design flaw and has had no problems of the type that have plagued Celebrity. That is to say, no canceled cruises, no missed ports or shortened port time, late arrivals or lawsuits against the manufacturer, which is unlike Celebrity what Celebrity has experienced over the years.

As one who used to be on a different cruise web site, which led to my making a huge mistake by mis-information and the fact that many new readers are coming to cruisemates every day looking for information, that information should be as accurate as possible. I just thought I should set the record straight and not let any mis-information about the two different propulsion systems confuse readers.

As I recall, Celebrity successfully sued the manufacturer of those pods. They were some of the first pods ever put into ships (and I believe the first by that particular manufacturer went into these Celebrity ships).

Although I do recall Carnival Elation had some of the very first pods ever.

They were a source of problems for Celebrity in the first few years, but all of these ships have been overhauled and the problems fixed. I can't remember the last time one of these vessels had a serious pod problem.

I just got off of Ruby Princess, and it does not use pods. So it is true that Princess is completely different.

As I recall, Celebrity successfully sued the manufacturer of those pods. They were some of the first pods ever put into ships (and I believe the first by that particular manufacturer went into these Celebrity ships).

Although I do recall Carnival Elation had some of the very first pods ever.

They were a source of problems for Celebrity in the first few years, but all of these ships have been overhauled and the problems fixed. I can't remember the last time one of these vessels had a serious pod problem.

I just got off of Ruby Princess, and it does not use pods. So it is true that Princess is completely different.

Hi Paul:

You are correct that the suit by Celebrity against Alstom has been settled for something like 7 million dollars, but the major suit against Rolls Royce in excess of 3oo million dollars, at last report, is still working its way through the court system.

IMHO, this was a problem for a lot more than the first few years and has actually produced many problem cruises from 2001 thru 2007 on Celebrity Millennium class ships.

To answer your question, the last serious propulsion on Millennium class ships was the Celebrity Infinity which had to sail at reduced speeds from late 2006 until May 20, 2007 while waiting for a scheduled dry dock time. Whether or not the problem has been fixed is nothing more than a matter of opinion. With the closed mouth approach by Celebrity it is hard to tell just what the real situation is. My theories are that Celebrity may not have been performing maintenance on the PODS to the manufacturers' specifications, or over zealous Captains may have pushed the PODS too hard causing undue stress or it could also be, as you said, that Celebrity has actually found a fix for the problem. With propulsion problems that cover a six year period has not been a good thing for passengers and granted no reported problems in the past year and a half has certainly been a bright spot for Celebrity m-class cruisers. Only time will tell if this problem for Celebrity and its passengers is really over or if it will come back to bite more m-class cruisers.

The Infinity had a pod replaced in September 2006 and since then has not had any reported problems. The prior pod problem reduced the speed from 22 to 19 knots.

I understand this will affect the schedule of the ship, but certainly not by much.

In any case - it appears to be an old problem so I don't see any reason to be spreading FUD about it now.

You are correct that the Celebrity Infinity did have one pod replaced in September of 2006.

The fact is that the other POD on the Infinity failed on the November 19, 2006 cruise, some two months later. As I said before the Infinity sailed until May 20, 2007, until the scheduled dry dock. At that time the defective POD was repaired. I can remember the last few cruises before dry dock in 2007 for the Infinity, were RT to Hawaii and more than 24 hours of port time were cut from the cruises and one port to make up for the lost time. The ship also was a half day late returning to California, for both Hawaii cruises, which caused many passengers to miss their flights home.

The normal cruising speed for the Summit was 22.5, which I believe would be the same on all four Celebrity Millennium cruise ships. The speed was not reduced to 19 knots but rather 17.5 knots, which is standard for m-class ships when having propulsion problems.

Celebrity's schedule might not have been affected very much, but my Celebrity cruise on the Summit most certainly was, with two missed ports, and missing Hubbard Glacier, just to name a couple of the disappointments.

My review is posted in the reader's review section if anyone is interested about what can and did happen on the May 7, 2006 Celebrity Summit cruise.

Sorry if you feel I am spreading, as youi said, "FUD" but all I was trying to do was to tell the facts as they are and correct statements that were not accurate. I realize that for some this may be old news but for your new readers I am certain that we all want them to have the correct facts to help them make their cruising decisions.

Back to Norm's question. Can anyone tell me if Celebrity just changing the way the name of the ship is displayed on the hull or has there been a change in the ship's registry?

While cruising aboard the former GTS Infinity over the past couple weeks, I noticed three external changes.

>> 1. Her hull now displays the name Celebrity Infinity.

Have any of you noticed similar changes on any of the other ships of Celebrity's fleet?

Norm.

Just got off the Mercury....the name on the side of the ship now says "Celebrity Mercury" in very small, unprofessional looking stenciled text. It almost looks like someone picked up a stencil kit at a hardware store and did it on 10 minutes notice. What's funny though is that you can still see the outline of the former, larger text that has been painted over. I assume they are still working on this but for the moment it looks pretty odd.

I am afraid you are 100% incorrect with your statement when trying to say the propulsion systems used by Celebrity Millennium class ships are "essentially the same" as those used on Princess. In fact, nothing could be farther from the truth.

My earlier post clearly was about the basic type of propulsion system (gas turbine prime mover powering a generator that supplies an electric motor on the shaft) rather than the manufacturers of the various components. That is what governs the classification of the ship. The manufacturer of the unit is irrelevant here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by You

The propulsion system used by Celebrity on their Millennium class ships are called Mermaid PODS and have been a source of problems since their introduction in 2001. Celebrity has admitted in court, under oath, that the Millennium class ship's propulsion systems have a design flaw. This is evidenced by Celebrity's two multi million lawsuits against the two manufactures, which are, Rolls Royce and Alstom manufacturing. It is also evidenced by the eighteen separate times the Mermaid propulsion system used by Celebrity has failed.

Princess uses a propulsion system manufactured by an entirely different company that does not have any design flaw and has had no problems of the type that have plagued Celebrity. That is to say, no canceled cruises, no missed ports or shortened port time, late arrivals or lawsuits against the manufacturer, which is unlike Celebrity what Celebrity has experienced over the years.

And how is any of this relevant to the present discussion of classification of the vessels?

But to set the record straight, Celebrity Cruises did prevail in the lawsuit against the manufacturer of the pods and the manufacturer supplied redesigned pods for these ships that seem to have solved the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by You

As one who used to be on a different cruise web site, which led to my making a huge mistake by mis-information and the fact that many new readers are coming to cruisemates every day looking for information, that information should be as accurate as possible. I just thought I should set the record straight and not let any mis-information about the two different propulsion systems confuse readers.

Yes, the information should be as accurate as possible. But it's pretty obnoxious to hijack a thread that's related only peripherally to the axe that you wish to grind about some problem that was corrected a while ago. I probably would have ignored your post, but this is far from the first time that you have done so.

Just got off the Mercury....the name on the side of the ship now says "Celebrity Mercury" in very small, unprofessional looking stenciled text. It almost looks like someone picked up a stencil kit at a hardware store and did it on 10 minutes notice. What's funny though is that you can still see the outline of the former, larger text that has been painted over. I assume they are still working on this but for the moment it looks pretty odd.

They probably will redo the lettering when the ship goes into the yards.

I am afraid you are 100% incorrect with your statement when trying to say the propulsion systems used by Celebrity Millennium class ships are "essentially the same" as those used on Princess. In fact, nothing could be farther from the truth.

My earlier post clearly was about the basic type of propulsion system (gas turbine prime mover powering a generator that supplies an electric motor on the shaft) rather than the manufacturers of the various components. That is what governs the classification of the ship. The manufacturer of the unit is irrelevant here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by You

The propulsion system used by Celebrity on their Millennium class ships are called Mermaid PODS and have been a source of problems since their introduction in 2001. Celebrity has admitted in court, under oath, that the Millennium class ship's propulsion systems have a design flaw. This is evidenced by Celebrity's two multi million lawsuits against the two manufactures, which are, Rolls Royce and Alstom manufacturing. It is also evidenced by the eighteen separate times the Mermaid propulsion system used by Celebrity has failed.

Princess uses a propulsion system manufactured by an entirely different company that does not have any design flaw and has had no problems of the type that have plagued Celebrity. That is to say, no canceled cruises, no missed ports or shortened port time, late arrivals or lawsuits against the manufacturer, which is unlike Celebrity what Celebrity has experienced over the years.

And how is any of this relevant to the present discussion of classification of the vessels?

But to set the record straight, Celebrity Cruises did prevail in the lawsuit against the manufacturer of the pods and the manufacturer supplied redesigned pods for these ships that seem to have solved the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by You

As one who used to be on a different cruise web site, which led to my making a huge mistake by mis-information and the fact that many new readers are coming to cruisemates every day looking for information, that information should be as accurate as possible. I just thought I should set the record straight and not let any mis-information about the two different propulsion systems confuse readers.

Yes, the information should be as accurate as possible. But it's pretty obnoxious to hijack a thread that's related only peripherally to the axe that you wish to grind about some problem that was corrected a while ago. I probably would have ignored your post, but this is far from the first time that you have done so.

Norm.

I agree completely Norm, hijacking a thread for personal purposes should not be permitted. Same thing was done on the other board on numerous occasions.

I also read something that one of the reasons they reflagged the vessels is to have the Captains legally be able to perform marriages particular on the new ships. Don't know if it's true but it is plausable.

(2) Norm quote: "But to set the record straight, Celebrity Cruises did
prevail in the lawsuit against the manufacturer of the
pods".

This morning I was talking to an attorney friend of mine, who happens to live in Florida, and he reported that he had just met someone who informed him that, as I have said previously, the lawsuit by Celebrity against the main manufacturer of the Celebrity M-Class ship's propulsion system, Rolls Royce, has not yet been settled.

Norm, it would be interesting to know where you got this information from. I know where my information came from and I am pretty certain that it is reliable, but I am always open to any proof that you can offer, that is not just based on wishful thinking. Can you give us a source and date of your alleged "settlement" with Rolls Royce, which you mentioned?

All opinions are great and that is what makes cruisemates such a valuable site, but facts should be presented as accurate facts and if not, then someone should correct them. We are all here to get information and the only "axe to grind", that I have, is against incorrect or misleading information.

One can sure get confused reading this stuff.
Does the MV Coral Princess and MV Island Princess use Electric engines to turn the props or do they use internal combustion diesel engines to turn the props.
I would presume they use diesel generators to produce electricity. This is an internal combustion engine used to turn turbines to produce electricity. I understood Norm to be saying that the Princess used regular Diesel engines to produce electricity to run the Princess Electric engines that turn props even though they are not pods.
I may have been confused since I only know about Celebrity.

The GTS system is expensive to run in port where at sea it is efficient. I think that is why Celebrity is putting diesel generators aboard to run for electricity in port when pods are not being used.

One can sure get confused reading this stuff.
Does the MV Coral Princess and MV Island Princess use Electric engines to turn the props or do they use internal combustion diesel engines to turn the props.
I would presume they use diesel generators to produce electricity. This is an internal combustion engine used to turn turbines to produce electricity. I understood Norm to be saying that the Princess used regular Diesel engines to produce electricity to run the Princess Electric engines that turn props even though they are not pods.
I may have been confused since I only know about Celebrity.

The GTS system is expensive to run in port where at sea it is efficient. I think that is why Celebrity is putting diesel generators aboard to run for electricity in port when pods are not being used.

Many newer ships use gas turbines rather than diesels as prime movers for their generators because they are more efficient when operating at speed, lighter and more compact (permitting mounting in the funnel rather than in deep in the hull), and less costly to maintain. They are essentially the same turbines that propel jet aircraft. You can see the turbines located outside of the funnel aboard MV Coral Princess and MV Island Princess.

Most new ships also use propulsion pods mounted outside of the hull rather than conventional shafts. The pod contains the propulsion motor and a short shaft with journal and thrust bearings. The shaft extends through one end of the pod to connect to the propeller. The pods usually rotate about a vertical axis, allowing their thrust to push the stern in any direction and thus eliminating the need for separate rudders. The advantage of these pods is that they move the motors outside the hull, freeing up space within the hull for other uses. But the drawback is that certain maintenance points -- including the main shaft bearings -- are now outside the hull, where it's necessary to put the ship into drydock to repair them if they fail.

Anyway, the ships that use gas turbine generators originally did not have any diesels at all. The gas turbine generators supply electricity for use within the ship as well as for propulsion. A couple years ago, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. determined that a small diesel generator set would generate electricity more efficiently when the ship is in port, and thus has retrofitted all of the company's gas turbine ships with a small auxilliary diesel generator in addition to the gas turnbine generators, while Princess has opted to shift to shore power in many ports of call instead. The gas turbines generators, however, remain the main source of electricity when these ships are at sea.

BTW, many of the ships built in the late 1990's -- including the Sun Princess and Grand Princess classes and MV Celebrity Century, MV Celebrity Galaxy, and MV Celebrity Mercury -- use diesel-electric drive as you describe.

As to classification, don't read too much into the designation of "MV" ("Motor Vessel") because its use depends upon the particular classification society to which a ship belongs. In fact, I'm surprised that the four ships of the Celebrity Millennium class got the "GTS" designation because the gas turbines are only prime movers for electrical generators. It's electric motors that turn the screws.